NCAA Week 10 Running Thread

[YGBFKM]

it does have wins in five different time zones this season.

BFD.

The PR firm Boise has working for it has really tapped into the lemmings this year. Hell, the Broncos aren't even the best non-BCS team in the country.

 

[Oz]

it does have wins in five different time zones this season.

BFD.

The PR firm Boise has working for it has really tapped into the lemmings this year. Hell, the Broncos aren't even the best non-BCS team in the country.

I didn't get that from Boise State's PR firm. I got it from looking at a schedule.

 

[YGBFKM]

it does have wins in five different time zones this season.

BFD.

The PR firm Boise has working for it has really tapped into the lemmings this year. Hell, the Broncos aren't even the best non-BCS team in the country.

I didn't get that from Boise State's PR firm. I got it from looking at a schedule.

If my research is correct, Boise also has more wins on blue turf than any team in the country. Like winning in five different time zones, a fact that is meaningless.

 

[Oz]

it does have wins in five different time zones this season.

BFD.

The PR firm Boise has working for it has really tapped into the lemmings this year. Hell, the Broncos aren't even the best non-BCS team in the country.

I didn't get that from Boise State's PR firm. I got it from looking at a schedule.

If my research is correct, Boise also has more wins on blue turf than any team in the country. Like winning in five different time zones, a fact that is meaningless.

Meaningless, like crushing a potential BCS-conference champion like Oregon, apparently. If a head-to-head meeting falls on deaf ears, if anyone who views Boise State as a BCS bowl-worthy team is seen as "lemmings," then there's really no discussion, no middle ground to be had here. Time to agree to disagree (again) and move on.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

Wins are wins. If all the undefeated teams have narrow victories, it isn't because they're not good, it's because winning every week is hard. It's the nature of the game, not their internal frailties, that's responsible. Boise is in a playoff game every week as far as qualifying for the BCS goes. That's a lot of pressure. Small wonder they scuffle every so.
I know the big schools operate under similar pressure, but it's lesser pressure. They can lose a game and still make the BCS title game. And yet they all have scrape-by wins on their resumes. I don't hold that against them. It's to a team's credit it won on a day it could have easily lost.
Bottom line: The very vociferousness of the argument on this thread is proof positive of the moral necessity of a playoff system. The BCS is actually WORSE than the old independent bowl game-postseason poll system. It is a sham of true competition, rather than an honest playoff or honest simple expression of opinion like the polls used to be.
Line below the bottom line: Aside from the insensate greed of those despicable hustlers, America's college presidents, the BCS's real reason for existence is to give BCS conference school fans an undeserved sense of superiority. Yeah, Texas may have beaten us 68-3, but no way Boise could play with us.

 

[Steak Snabler]

it does have wins in five different time zones this season.

BFD.

The PR firm Boise has working for it has really tapped into the lemmings this year. Hell, the Broncos aren't even the best non-BCS team in the country.

I didn't get that from Boise State's PR firm. I got it from looking at a schedule.

If my research is correct, Boise also has more wins on blue turf than any team in the country. Like winning in five different time zones, a fact that is meaningless.

If they win in the Newfoundland time zone, that would be notable ...

 

[Michael_ Gee]

Everybody's afraid to play Newfoundland on the road.

 

[JackReacher]

Boise looks, um...not too good.

Oregon > Boise

Actually, 8 < 19. And Boise State missed two field goals and lost three fumbles in that game, so the Broncos were far from perfect and still manhandled the Ducks on the both offense and defense.

Yeah. Pretty sure I don't care about 19-8, which you're trying to make at least 25-8. Hell, why don't you just say, "If Boise REALLY played well that night, it would have won 78-8"?

I. Don't. Care.

IMO..... Oregon > Boise

But I guess you're one of the ones who think Washington > USC, huh?

 

[micropolitan guy]

IMO..... Oregon > Boise

But I guess you're one of the ones who think Washington > USC, huh?

Sorry, but head-to-head, Boise State was clearly better than Oregon. It wasn't even close. It wasn't close in 2008 either, despite Oregon's window-dressing rally, so this year proved it wasn't a fluke.

And yes, on that day, Washington was better than USC, probably because Barkley was injured and DNP. But for a season, it has proven it isn't.

Boise, OTOH, has proven itself over the course of the season by defeating Oregon and then winning every other game. And yes, winning in five time zones means you can perform outside your comfort zone, something some BCS teams (Florida is the notable one here) should attempt once in a while.

Not saying Boise should play for the national championship, or that they are better than TCU. But should they remain undefeated they are definitely worthy of one of the four at-large BCS berths, especially over any two-loss team, like Notre Dame or Ohio State, should the Buckeyes not win the Big Ten.

Is the WAC as good as the Pac-10, MWC or Big 10? Top-to-bottom, no. But there's no law that says the WAC's best team can't be as good as the Pac-10's best team, especially since head-to-head it clearly proved it's better.

 

[JackReacher]

Head to head, yes, Boise was better. I got no argument for that.

Now? I think things have changed and Oregon is the better team. Not exactly fair to Boise, I understand.

And last year's results have nothing to do with my thoughts on Oregon-Boise this year. Nothing. Because they don't matter.

 

[Mystery Meat II]

So once you lose to a team, you can't ever work your way back to their level unless they suffer an embarrassing loss? Oregon can beat USC and Arizona and run the table in the Pac 10 and beat three teams then-ranked in the top 20 (including Utah, a mid-major and thus morally superior to those icky BCS schools), and they can't ever be considered better than a Boise team that has struggled against Tulsa, La. Tech and FCS Cal-Davis, just so long as they don't lose? Really? Really?

And what exactly are we arguing regarding Boise State? There's precious little chance they'll pop into the national title game unless Texas, Cincinnati, Iowa or TCU lose. They're ranked in the top 5 by all the human polls, so whatever respect angle they're trying to play would be better used on the computers, which won't care (and which also makes the PR campaign a total waste of money, since they're not moving up unless teams ahead of them lose, which is out of the control of pencils and microphones).

I wouldn't mind a non-BCS team making the title game. I just hope it's TCU, which doesn't mind playing unbalanced schedules to build respect.

 

[JackReacher]

No, No, No, Meat. Head to head battles, no matter when they take place, are the ONLY thing to take into consideration when ranking teams. Nothing else matters. :

Honestly, I know better. I shouldn't have even started it again. Oh well. No reason this week's thread should be any less entertaining than last week's.

 

[Cosmo]

I think the point, Sonner, is that for the most part, college football operates in a "we really don't know" sort of stratosphere. We can look at results and try to come up with a they beat them so them would beat those so therefore those would be they, or some crap like that. But in Boise-Oregon, we actually have some real, tangible on the field results to judge the two teams on. Oregon is playing better now than it did early in the season, and it very well may be playing better than Boise right now, but we've but Boise and Oregon on the same field twice in the last two years, once in Eugene and once in Boise, and the Broncos won both times easily.

 

[JackReacher]

I get all that, Cosmo. But to me, it's all about timing. If Boise had beaten Oregon, say, two or three weeks ago, I'd definitely think Boise is the better team right now. However, that game happened like two months ago. A lot more can change in two months than in two weeks.

 

[Cosmo]

You have to respect, too, that conference play is so much different than non-conference play. And that goes for the SEC, WAC, Pac-10, whatever. These coaches know each other so well, and they know their opponents tendencies better than coaches playing a non-conference team in the first or second week of the season.

That said, I think Oregon is playing better football right now than Boise State. I also think USC is a touch overrated, and I felt that way before the game in Eugene last week. But I can't get past the fact that Boise crushed Oregon earlier this season. That has to mean something.

 

[D-3 Fan]

it does have wins in five different time zones this season.

BFD.

The PR firm Boise has working for it has really tapped into the lemmings this year. Hell, the Broncos aren't even the best non-BCS team in the country.

I didn't get that from Boise State's PR firm. I got it from looking at a schedule.

Correction, it was the WAC who hired the PR firm, not Boise.

I find it interesting that everyone wants to rip Boise now, given the fact that no one wants to play them in Boise over the next several years.

 

[JackReacher]

But I can't get past the fact that Boise crushed Oregon earlier this season. That has to mean something.

It does mean something. How MUCH it means, compared to other factors, changes from person to person, though.

It obviously means more to you than it does to me. And that's fine. Like I said, I can completely understand that rationale. It doesn't suck.

 

[D-3 Fan]

Wins are wins. If all the undefeated teams have narrow victories, it isn't because they're not good, it's because winning every week is hard. It's the nature of the game, not their internal frailties, that's responsible. Boise is in a playoff game every week as far as qualifying for the BCS goes. That's a lot of pressure. Small wonder they scuffle every so.
I know the big schools operate under similar pressure, but it's lesser pressure. They can lose a game and still make the BCS title game. And yet they all have scrape-by wins on their resumes. I don't hold that against them. It's to a team's credit it won on a day it could have easily lost.

Michael, that is the best assessment I've read this season, and gives a strong reason that the BCS and the conference championship games is a money grab, pure and simple.

 

[Songbird]

I get all that, Cosmo. But to me, it's all about timing. If Boise had beaten Oregon, say, two or three weeks ago, I'd definitely think Boise is the better team right now. However, that game happened like two months ago. A lot more can change in two months than in two weeks.

Ryan, we don't get to play that game. If they played a few weeks ago and yadda yadda. That's not fair. We always say "who won head to head?" and well, Boise State has beaten Oregon head to head twice in a row, including Eugene, where USC lost by 4 touchdowns.

It's not fair to Boise to keep throwing the same crap against the wall and say they're not deserving because of this, that or the other. Boise has beaten Oregon twice in a row in consecutive years, home and away. Boise is the better team.

 

[Oz]

Boise looks, um...not too good.

Oregon > Boise

Actually, 8 < 19. And Boise State missed two field goals and lost three fumbles in that game, so the Broncos were far from perfect and still manhandled the Ducks on the both offense and defense.

Yeah. Pretty sure I don't care about 19-8, which you're trying to make at least 25-8. Hell, why don't you just say, "If Boise REALLY played well that night, it would have won 78-8"?

I. Don't. Care.

IMO..... Oregon > Boise

But I guess you're one of the ones who think Washington > USC, huh?

Never said it should have been 25-8. Simply said that the Broncos, like the Ducks, had room to improve from that first game. They were less than perfect in smashing Oregon, it's not like they won only because the Ducks were sloppy, because they were sloppy, too.

And no, I don't believe Washington > USC. Washington has five losses, USC only two, so no rational person could make the argument that the Huskies are the better team despite the head-to-head outcome. With Boise State, however, it's undefeated and one game better than the Ducks this season. If you're comparing two relatively equal teams, it makes sense to go with the head-to-head outcome if they did play.